Talk:Sidekick (3.5e Feat)
Huh? "This sidekick do not again experience, act during your initiative but is otherwise as a cohort." Ok, do you mean This sidekick does not gain experience, and it acts during your initiative but is otherwise a cohort. Or This sidekick does not gain experience, and dosent act during your initiative but is otherwise a cohort. ? -- 23:35, November 15, 2009 (UTC) :I think that it means It does not gain experience but always is your ECL -4. So if you are level 17, your sidekick is level 13, and when you level to 18, your sidekick is now level 14The Dire Reverend 15:49, June 5, 2010 (UTC) Some Problems Because of the fact that the Sidekick acts during the Player's initiative, this could possibly be abused. For example, my character has a crazy dexterity score and has improved initiative. My sidekick, on the other hand, has 10 to his dex and he wears full plate armor. He is gaining the benefits of a large dex and a feat for nothing. The exact opposite is also an issue. If I have no dex, but my sidekick has a high dex, it does not help him. Only an Idiot would give their sidekick the improved initiative feat, as it would never have any effect. The Dire Reverend 02:11, June 25, 2010 (UTC) : A lesser evil compare how leadership mess with battle like a kitten with a yawn. You could houserule that improved initiative when taken by your sidekick give your main character a +2 initiative bonus, among other things. Still imho it a better as it is right now, unless convinced otherwise. --Leziad 02:17, June 25, 2010 (UTC) :: The fact that they both operate on the same turn makes it better than leadership? The Dire Reverend 04:08, June 25, 2010 (UTC) :::No... I think Lez just doesn't see the same init thing as an issue of large enough import to change the feat. With an ECL/CR of 4 less than you they're going to be handy but not tide-turning, and the exact time that they get their turn in the first round (init only matters in the first round unless you're doing a roll every round thing since it's all back and forth after that) isn't all that important. I actually see it as a useful simplification that helps keep the player's turn together instead of asking them to track separate inits. If you don't like it though, just let them roll their own init. - TarkisFlux 04:42, June 25, 2010 (UTC) :::: Tarkisflux: "With an ECL/CR of 4 less than you they're going to be handy but not tide-turning..." :::: I've got an artificer lying around who says differently :-P 1/2 ECL might be better if you don't want the overpowering overpoweredness that Leadership-style feats can bring. ("This one feat is stronger in power than your whole character!") --Ghostwheel 05:08, June 25, 2010 (UTC) ::::: Illusionist/fighter, double rogue, cleric/paladin, dusk blade/archer, scout+ninja... there are thousands of game shattering combos that this feat can offer. I agree with ghost on this one: while not much more game breaking compared to leadership, this is still very powerful. The initiative is not a problem that I can see, though maybe make the init mod the average of you and your buddy. That would balance it out more.--Teh Storm 07:05, June 25, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Bring your artificer, I don't actually care. If you have a wizard level sidekick, it better be a wizard level game, at which point you should be doing more crazy shit than he is already or you're doing it wrong. Yes, this feat can be used to bring in an option stronger than someone else's entire character, if you use it to grab power from above your game's balance level. I rather thought that doing that was a retarded thing that didn't need to be mentioned. I guess I was wrong. If the feat needs anything added to it, a line to the effect of "Your cohort must belong to a class from the same, or lower if you really want, balance level as the lowest member of the party." CR-4 is already supposed to be a character 1/4 as powerful as yourself (and thus the party if at the same level; assuming no balance level shenanigans), 1/2 CR just makes this a decreasing returns feat for no good reason once the other thing has been dealt with. - TarkisFlux 14:47, June 25, 2010 (UTC) :::::::: You forget that not everyone works with balance levels. Writing like that just makes it more confusing for the casual visitor that may want to use this. But what if a different change was made? The feat is called "Sidekick", so what if the cohort was what a sidekick is in regards to heros: a lower level character the character who takes this feat is mentoring. The character would be the same class as the character, just four levels lower and levels when the player does. The only problem I could foresee for this mechanic is what would happen if the character multiclasses or takes a prestige class.--Teh Storm 00:47, June 26, 2010 (UTC) :::::::::By posting on this wiki, one agrees to operate within pre-determined balance points. One of your big problems is that you never actually read Dungeons_and_Dragons_Wiki:Balance_Points. There is a reason it's the first article on the main page.--Tavis McCricket 17:36, June 27, 2010 (UTC) :::::::::: I'm not talking about posters. We know the rules and balance points. I'm talking about Joe Googlesearch who runs across this page. While I know most people on this site write material assuming that only other members will read it, we have to keep in mind the casual visitors. Balance level is how we measure the power level of the feat, and good as a general branding "this is security clearance blah", but we should never have mechanics that operate on it.--Teh Storm 21:08, June 27, 2010 (UTC) :::::::::::Yeah, I actually rethought that addition already, and I don't think that's a reasonable thing to add to anything, ever. So you're right that it's a bad addition, and shouldn't be there. If anything, it should be a DM approval requirement since it's basically impossible to write a feat that stretches balance levels without leaving yourself open to balance issues in certain situations. These are situations that I think are easy enough to deal with in game as to not be worth writing options out of the feat like your suggestion of same class mentoring, but they require that someone be aware of and able to deal with them. I'm not saying that there's no problem because the DM can just not allow it, I'm saying that this feat leaves options on the table that are not appropriate in numerous game syles and may cause problems if they are allowed and someone should be empowered to veto them before they get to that point. And that's as good as you can really get with an "Unquantifiable" balance point that specifically allows material from various balance points. - TarkisFlux 21:24, June 27, 2010 (UTC) A Witch Without Her Flying Monkeys?!? If this feat is to be a more balanced version of Leadership, is there going to be a second feat that allows access to armies of in competent minions? The original leadership feat was intended to allow player to have their own political power and influence over a group of followers, the cohort being a second in command over your posse. As game breaking as it can be, the minions are my favorite part of the feat. So what is your plan for this part of the fun?--Teh Storm 07:11, June 25, 2010 (UTC) :Pre-empted you back in Feburary. -- Eiji Hyrule 12:43, June 25, 2010 (UTC) :: Kewl! Thanks for pointing that out! ;)--Teh Storm 00:39, June 26, 2010 (UTC)